Quote:
Originally Posted by Reckoner
Anyways, how is this theory at all a slight to the show?
|
Because it casts aspersions on why people liked the show, and chose to buy it on DVD/Blu-Ray.
For a person who hates a show, it's much easier to attribute its success to things like "brand names", "marketability", "hype", and
everything but simple widespread viewer satisfaction with the show and fan assessment of its merits.
You don't want to accept the fact that a large number of viewers and purchasers may have simply considered K-On to be one of the best of its genre, and worth owning as such.
Quote:
|
You're trying to basically tell me that the marketability of the show wasn't an enormous factor in the show's success and that it was all simply based on its own merits.
|
I never said that its success was
all based on its own merits. However, I don't see any reason to think that its success was any less based on its merits than Clannad's success was based on its own merits or Kanon 2006's success was based on its own merits.
All three are KyoAni works. All three have source material fans (the Key fanbase, in fact, was probably larger than the K-On fanbase prior to K-On being adapted into an anime). All three are easy to market, and were well-marketed.
Quote:
|
Explain to me for example how IS or Bakemongatari is in any way as marketable as this show.
|
IS and Bake both have a very strong harem anime element to them, and harem anime trope elements (particularly character types) are frequently easy to market and are popular.
IS had the added benefit of having mechas in it, at a time when new/recent mecha anime was very hard to find. That likely helped its cross-genre marketability.
Bake was helped by the Shinbo/SHAFT artistic style (which can be used in marketing), which is clearly quite popular (consider Madoka's success as well here).
Quote:
|
Not going to respond to the rest because my personal views on the franchise don't matter to this discussion.
|
If only that were the case...